Citizen Portal
Sign In

Regents defend review that flags 62 low‑producing programs as they develop performance funding

Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education presentation to the Oklahoma House budget committee · January 26, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Regents said a program review identified 41 programs for deletion and 21 for suspension to better align academic offerings with workforce needs; officials said programs are initially flagged by enrollment counts but institutions can request exceptions and present plans to strengthen offerings.

Regents leadership told lawmakers their comprehensive review of degree programs produced recommendations to delete 41 low‑producing programs and suspend 21 others, a total of 62 changes designed to better align academic offerings with workforce demand and institutional priorities.

Chancellor Burridge said programs were initially flagged based on enrollment and degree production metrics and that institutions may seek exceptions or propose plans to increase enrollment or preserve strategic programs. "The programs are flagged based on just the number of students," he said, adding there is a process for exceptions and that many institutions will use the review to make difficult local decisions.

Representatives raised concerns about arts programs and students who stay enrolled because of arts offerings. Burridge acknowledged those concerns and said some exceptions and targeted plans address arts and other mission‑driven programs. Legislators also asked how much money would be saved by eliminating programs; Burridge said he did not have per‑program savings figures at the hearing but expected reallocated resources to support higher‑need programs.

The Regents tied the program review to a broader push for accountability and are developing a performance funding model that would tie some allocations to outcomes such as completion and workforce alignment. Burridge said a draft of the formula will be shared with regents and campus presidents this week and next, and emphasized the intention is not to be punitive but to reward programs and institutions that produce results.

The committee requested the full list of flagged programs; Burridge agreed to provide it to the committee. Legislators signaled interest in how program eliminations would be phased, the size of any savings, and how arts and mission‑critical programs would be considered under exceptions.